State v. Delacruz-Gomez

Summary

The court held that testimony identifying the felony charges in the defendant's arrest warrant was admissible because it was relevant to the reasonableness of the officers' use of force and the performance-of-duty element of the charged offenses, and the trial court sufficiently mitigated prejudice. It held that identifying the arresting unit as the "Violent Fugitive Task Force" was irrelevant and unfairly prejudicial, but concluded that the error did not substantially sway the verdict in light of the strong evidence and the defense's focus on causation. The judgment was affirmed.